New Budget Recommendations -- eliminate AAP busing and centers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes they are entitled to a different experience-such is the nature of special Ed

Now this is just silly. It is a known fact that AAP is NOT special Ed. There may be some kids within AAP who have LDs, but the program as a whole isn't considered "special ed." Sorry.

The original mandate to even have GT (now AAP) is that it was "special education" for children who truly do learn differently. Take away the special ed part and you really don't have a reason to separate out these kids into centers.

Gifted education is special education in every sense of the word. Don't see anyone clamoring to get rid of the other end of the spectrum of special Ed and stop mainstreaming kids with autism, etc.

Well, in the sense of the law it isn't. So there is that.

In the sense of the law, gifted education IS a special Ed program that FCPS is required by law to provide. It doesn't have to look like current AAP, but there has to be something. Also why centers must provide busing unless there is a base school gifted option.

It is not part of IDEA, IDA or NCLB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mainstreaming kids who are struggling to stay with the class is a step up for them. Mainstreaming the AAP kids is a step down (academically speaking).

Step up for one group. Step down for the other. Not the same.

Bad argument, PP.

Oh, no. It hurts my heart to even consider AAP snowflakes "having" to be educated in the same classroom as the other kids, who might have scored ever so slightly less than them on a test given in 1st and 2nd grade. It's a miracle that kids manage to do this successfully in other school districts across the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mainstreaming kids who are struggling to stay with the class is a step up for them. Mainstreaming the AAP kids is a step down (academically speaking).

Step up for one group. Step down for the other. Not the same.

Bad argument, PP.

If that's seriously your argument, how do you justify the bright Gen Ed kids having to "step down" by being in class with the kids who are being "stepped up"? So its ok for them to have to accomodate students who need a slower pace, but apparently unacceptable for AAP kids to have to do the same? Thank you for so perfectly illustrating the incredibly entitled AAP parent mentality. What's fine for all the other kids just isn't going to fly for your special snowflakes. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mainstreaming kids who are struggling to stay with the class is a step up for them. Mainstreaming the AAP kids is a step down (academically speaking).

Step up for one group. Step down for the other. Not the same.

Bad argument, PP.

Oh, no. It hurts my heart to even consider AAP snowflakes "having" to be educated in the same classroom as the other kids, who might have scored ever so slightly less than them on a test given in 1st and 2nd grade. It's a miracle that kids manage to do this successfully in other school districts across the country.

AAP Center eligibility is not determined by a single test score on a single day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes they are entitled to a different experience-such is the nature of special Ed

Now this is just silly. It is a known fact that AAP is NOT special Ed. There may be some kids within AAP who have LDs, but the program as a whole isn't considered "special ed." Sorry.

The original mandate to even have GT (now AAP) is that it was "special education" for children who truly do learn differently. Take away the special ed part and you really don't have a reason to separate out these kids into centers.

Gifted education is special education in every sense of the word. Don't see anyone clamoring to get rid of the other end of the spectrum of special Ed and stop mainstreaming kids with autism, etc.

Well, in the sense of the law it isn't. So there is that.

In the sense of the law, gifted education IS a special Ed program that FCPS is required by law to provide. It doesn't have to look like current AAP, but there has to be something. Also why centers must provide busing unless there is a base school gifted option.

It is not part of IDEA, IDA or NCLB.

But it is LEGALLY REQUIRED in Virginia. http://www.doe.virginia.gov/instruction/gifted_ed/gifted_regulations.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes they are entitled to a different experience-such is the nature of special Ed

Now this is just silly. It is a known fact that AAP is NOT special Ed. There may be some kids within AAP who have LDs, but the program as a whole isn't considered "special ed." Sorry.

The original mandate to even have GT (now AAP) is that it was "special education" for children who truly do learn differently. Take away the special ed part and you really don't have a reason to separate out these kids into centers.

Gifted education is special education in every sense of the word. Don't see anyone clamoring to get rid of the other end of the spectrum of special Ed and stop mainstreaming kids with autism, etc.

Well, in the sense of the law it isn't. So there is that.

In the sense of the law, gifted education IS a special Ed program that FCPS is required by law to provide. It doesn't have to look like current AAP, but there has to be something. Also why centers must provide busing unless there is a base school gifted option.

It is not part of IDEA, IDA or NCLB.

But it is LEGALLY REQUIRED in Virginia. http://www.doe.virginia.gov/instruction/gifted_ed/gifted_regulations.pdf

Yes, school systems have to have some sort of program, BUT it is not part of Special Education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mainstreaming kids who are struggling to stay with the class is a step up for them. Mainstreaming the AAP kids is a step down (academically speaking).

Step up for one group. Step down for the other. Not the same.

Bad argument, PP.

Oh, no. It hurts my heart to even consider AAP snowflakes "having" to be educated in the same classroom as the other kids, who might have scored ever so slightly less than them on a test given in 1st and 2nd grade. It's a miracle that kids manage to do this successfully in other school districts across the country.

AAP Center eligibility is not determined by a single test score on a single day.

+1. So tired of this argument, because it is false. GBRS, parent commentary, private letters of recommendation & work samples also play a huge role. And if you think the NNAT and COGAT are wrong, you can also get private testing done. And FCPS will pay for repeat testing after a year or 2. And you can reapply each year through 8th grate. FCPS bends over backwards to do "holistic admissions" and give you the change to present

[Anonymous]

^^ present your child in the best possible light-- as many times as you want. The money FCPS spends busing is nothing compared to the $$ spent testing, screening, On AARTs to manage this process, on appeals, etc. I'm sure it make you feel better to think that you child is not in AAP because they missed 1-2 too many questions on a one shot test given when they were 7, but that is not the way selection happens.
-- a mom whose child was placed in AAP even though her COGAT & NNAT were not in pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mainstreaming kids who are struggling to stay with the class is a step up for them. Mainstreaming the AAP kids is a step down (academically speaking).

Step up for one group. Step down for the other. Not the same.

Bad argument, PP.

If that's seriously your argument, how do you justify the bright Gen Ed kids having to "step down" by being in class with the kids who are being "stepped up"? So its ok for them to have to accomodate students who need a slower pace, but apparently unacceptable for AAP kids to have to do the same? Thank you for so perfectly illustrating the incredibly entitled AAP parent mentality. What's fine for all the other kids just isn't going to fly for your special snowflakes. Got it.

+1000
APPLAUSE. The hypocrisy is astounding, isn't it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yes they are entitled to a different experience-such is the nature of special Ed

Now this is just silly. It is a known fact that AAP is NOT special Ed. There may be some kids within AAP who have LDs, but the program as a whole isn't considered "special ed." Sorry.

The original mandate to even have GT (now AAP) is that it was "special education" for children who truly do learn differently. Take away the special ed part and you really don't have a reason to separate out these kids into centers.

Gifted education is special education in every sense of the word. Don't see anyone clamoring to get rid of the other end of the spectrum of special Ed and stop mainstreaming kids with autism, etc.

Well, in the sense of the law it isn't. So there is that.

In the sense of the law, gifted education IS a special Ed program that FCPS is required by law to provide. It doesn't have to look like current AAP, but there has to be something. Also why centers must provide busing unless there is a base school gifted option.

It is not part of IDEA, IDA or NCLB.

But it is LEGALLY REQUIRED in Virginia. http://www.doe.virginia.gov/instruction/gifted_ed/gifted_regulations.pdf

Yes, school systems have to have some sort of program, BUT it is not part of Special Education.

+1 I find it both amusing and kind of sickening that some some people are actually equating AAP with Special Education. That so diminishes the kids who actually need Special Ed services.

Also, nowhere does it state that VA is required to provide centers. They are not mandated by law, period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, the pp is arguing that centers are unnecessary because 10 years ago GT students were "always" in their base schools. I pointed out this is not true.

The point is that separate education (centers) for AAP kids is unnecessary. They can be taught in their own base schools, as they used to be. It's interesting that AAP parents think their kids need to be taught separately, but that it's just fine for the kids at the opposite end of the spectrum to be fully integrated in the General Ed. classes. If it's fine for those kids, then it should be fine for the AAP kids. Right? Or are AAP kids somehow entitled to a separate educational experience?

I disagree.

You disagree with what part? That kids on the lower end of the spectrum should be included in "regular" classrooms, or that AAP kids should be? Because if we're going to push for inclusion of all kids, then why should AAP be any different? No need for a special learning environment.

I disagree with your post.

I disagree too. Dunno where you got the not-so-interesting idea that all AAP parents think its just fine for every child but their own to have the same educational experience. Try again without the straw man.

Gosh, I don't know... maybe I got that idea after hearing AAP parents demanding ad nauseum to send their kids to centers and have them in AAP-only classrooms. Just a wild guess.

Wild as in reckless and wrong. Hearing AAP parents defend their kids' rights to get the education mandated by state law has nothing to do with whether kids "at the opposite end of the spectrum" should be grouped in General Ed. Why do you keep trying to connect the two?

Actually, the two have everything to do with one another and the fact that you can't (or won't) see that says a lot about your ability to connect the dots. If it's supposedly ok to educate one end of the spectrum together with Gen Ed kids, then it should be equally acceptable to also educate the other end of the spectrum with Gen Ed students. What makes you think AAP kids should have a separate learning experience, but all the other kids should be grouped together, regardless of learning abilities?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mainstreaming kids who are struggling to stay with the class is a step up for them. Mainstreaming the AAP kids is a step down (academically speaking).

Step up for one group. Step down for the other. Not the same.

Bad argument, PP.

I can't even believe someone would have the gaul to write this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mainstreaming kids who are struggling to stay with the class is a step up for them. Mainstreaming the AAP kids is a step down (academically speaking).

Step up for one group. Step down for the other. Not the same.

Bad argument, PP.

If that's seriously your argument, how do you justify the bright Gen Ed kids having to "step down" by being in class with the kids who are being "stepped up"? So its ok for them to have to accomodate students who need a slower pace, but apparently unacceptable for AAP kids to have to do the same? Thank you for so perfectly illustrating the incredibly entitled AAP parent mentality. What's fine for all the other kids just isn't going to fly for your special snowflakes. Got it.

I don't. I have a gen ed kid too and I know there are many who could and should be given the same curriculum. BUT, the argument that the PP was making i.e. special ed kids get mainstreamed, so AAP kids should be mainstreamed, just doesn't make any sense. They are two different groups and the reason for "mainstreaming" one does not apply to the other.

[Anonymous]

by "same curriculum" I mean there are many in gen ed who should have the AAP curriculum. I totally agree with that.

But, special ed is just a different thing and mainstreaming special ed kids is not relevant to this conversation about AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:by "same curriculum" I mean there are many in gen ed who should have the AAP curriculum. I totally agree with that.

But, special ed is just a different thing and mainstreaming special ed kids is not relevant to this conversation about AAP.

Well, except for those students who are both.